Resultados de la búsqueda:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mTOKhSpe9Cs

>>1520043
>¿Exactamente de dónde sacaste esa información? ¿Y cómo sabes que no está alterada? Ya que tanto te quejas de la información que mandan los otros anons
En ningun momento me he "quejado" de la informacion, la he refutado como lo hice con el tipo que menciona el DSM como la biblia perfecta, y la evidencia es esta:
Okami, P., & Goldberg, A. (1992). "Personality Correlates of Pedophilia: Are They Reliable Indicators?," Journal of Sex Research, 29(3), 297-328.
>". . . most data suggest that only a relatively small portion of the population of incarcerated sexual offenders against minors consists of persons for whom minors (particularly children) represent the exclusive or even primary object of sexual interest or source of arousal (Freund, Watson, & Dickey, 1991; Gebhard et al., 1965; Howells, 1981; Lang et al., 1988; Langevin, 1983; McCormack & Selvaggio, 1989; Marshall, Babaree, & Butt, 1988; Marshall & Eccles, 1991; Mohr et al., 1964; Quinsey, Chaplin, & Carrigan, 1979; Righton, 1981; Rowan, 1988; Schofield, 1965; Swanson, 1968)."
Kesicky, D. et al (2014). "Pedophiles and (or) child molesters," European Psychiatry, Volume 29, Supp 1, Page 1.
>"Experimental sample consists of 146 forensic cases (all men), they committed child molestation in years 2005–2012. According to the criteria (DSM-IV-TR) for pedophilia, penile plethysmography (PPG), actual clinical and case history data were used for the diagnosis determination. Obtained clinical and sociodemographic data were statistically evaluated. Only a small part (16,2 %) of sexual offenders against children meet the criteria (DSM-IV-TR) for pedophilia."

>Oh, qué interesante anon, ¿Donde están los ejemplos?
Ironicamente hay una pagina de pedofilos que se encarga de recopilar esos casos de gente no relacionada a esa pagina ni a ningun activista
https://www.newgon.net/wiki/Accounts_and_Testimonies
>Oh anon, ¿Qué te dije? Necesitas ejemplos para demostrar tu punto, no soy adivino anon.
Este estudio sobre como la interaccion sexual en si misma causa trauma
>Rind, Bruce; Tromovitch, Philip; Bauserman, Robert (1998). "A Meta-Analytic Examination of Assumed Properties of Child Sexual Abuse Using College Samples," Psychological Bulletin, 124(1), 22-53
"Many lay persons and professionals believe that child sexual abuse (CSA) causes intense harm, regardless of gender, pervasively in the general population. The authors examined this belief by reviewing 59 studies based on college samples. Meta-analyses revealed that students with CSA were, on average, slightly less well adjusted than controls. However, this poorer adjustment could not be attributed to CSA because family environment (FE) was consistently confounded with CSA, FE explained considerably more adjustment variance than CSA, and CSA-adjustment relations generally became nonsignificant when studies controlled for FE. Self-reported reactions to and effects from CSA indicated that negative effects were neither pervasive nor typically intense, and that men reacted much less negatively than women. The college data were completely consistent with data from national samples. [...]

Y sobre el daño causado por terceros gracias al estigma
>Oellerich, Thomas D. (2001). "Child Sexual Abuse: Is the Routine Provision of Psychotherapy Warranted?," IPT Journal, 11(1).
"Social workers should educate the community and the courts about the myths surrounding the problem of child sexual abuse. This includes laying to rest the myth that because a sexual activity violates a moral and/or a legal code that it is thereby necessarily or even usually psychologically harmful. In other words, it is time to stop equating wrongfulness with harrnfulness in sexual matters as suggested by Rind and Tromovitch (1997).
Perpetuating the myth that sexual abuse is necessarily or usually harmful is unethical and creates possible iatrogenic effects, as noted sometime ago by Schultz (1980)
(...)
Social workers should educate courts to stop routinely referring the sexually abused for therapy. Child sexual abuse is not a psychiatric disorder or a syndrome (Finkelhor, & Berliner, 1995). Rather it is an event or series of events in a person's life. Treatment is indicated only when there is currently demonstrable harm. To do otherwise is similar to a physician treating children for bicycle accidents. Many children who have a bicycle accident do not require treatment. When they do need treatment, it is for a clinical condition rather than the event responsible for that condition. In other words, the asymptomatic child or adolescent should not be treated.
(...)
Child sexual abuse has become an arena for opportunistic therapists to exploit and revictimize victims of child sexual abuse. It is time to heed and respond to the earlier warning of Browne and Finkelhor (1986). They warned that "advocates not exaggerate or overstate the intensity or inevitability of these consequences" because "victims and their families ... may be further victimized by exaggerated claims about the effects of sexual abuse" (p. 178). Indeed, it is time that, as recommended by Seligman, parents of sexually abused children were encouraged "to turn down the volume" lest they create or aggravate a negative reaction to the abuse."